Working to pay for childcare

duchy

I think the point is that if someone is going back to work simply to cover childcare costs then it is always a transitional plan. When the child starts school childcare costs drop dramatically - and the parent can often also increase their hours.

Plenty of parents change what they do as circumstances change-I've done the SAHM thing , part-time, job-share and full-time. All had pluses and minuses.

Air_Cooled_75

Argh, I'd give anyone short shrift (only if I was feeling kind, otherwise it'd be much worse) who said I was scrounging off my husband! I worked for nearly 20 years before we had our son and I spent nearly half of that putting my husband through his degree and PhD!

I wasn't a career woman but I did earn a very decent wage.

We get Child Benefit (Family Allowance when I was younger) and husband pays into the child care voucher scheme through work. As we don't have any family within an hour and a half this gives me a much needed break. LO goes 3 days but it still costs £350 a month (and this includes 15 'free' hours a week) so really there isn't even much in the way of tax relief from this scheme every month.

I'm not really sure working 'sets a good example' (it obviously doesn't set a bad example) unless you are in a culture where no one works? My boy knows I worked before he popped out of me.

He starts school in September and I will probably find something very part time. It will only be around school hours but then I'm not sure I want to shell out for 'holiday club' and the like. I also have no desire to go out to (paid) work and then come home and do more (unpaid) work.

To keep this on track had I gone back to work after LO was born my wages would've only really paid for childcare. In our position going back to work just wasn't an option for me.

onlyroz

jaylee3 wrote: »

This is not meant as an attack on working parents at all, but I believe the children are happiest when at least one parent is at home all the time. I know it's not always practical, because of how expensive the cost of living is these days, but in an ideal world, someone would be home all the time for the kids when they were school age.

Children are happiest when they have plenty of love and affection, and a wide variety of activities and social opportunities to keep them occupied. This can just as easily be provided by parents, grand parents, teachers and qualified childcare professionals.

Why on earth would a parent need to be at home when the kids are at school? For what purpose? There's only so much time you can spend cooking and cleaning. And what sort of example is that setting your children?

sulphate

onlyroz wrote: »

Children are happiest when they have plenty of love and affection, and a wide variety of activities and social opportunities to keep them occupied. This can just as easily be provided by parents, grand parents, teachers and qualified childcare professionals.

Why on earth would a parent need to be at home when the kids are at school? For what purpose? There's only so much time you can spend cooking and cleaning. And what sort of example is that setting your children?

Agreed 10000%

My mum worked and my dad was at home when I was at school. My dad wasn't "there for me"- he wasn't exactly a model SAHD, yes he was in the house but I was left to my own devices and ignored most of the time. Mum and I were much closer and I used to count the minutes til she got home. Now my mum and I are still close and my dad and I don't have much of a relationship but he is pretty narcissistic.

I realise this is an extreme example but being at home doesn't automatically mean your kids will be happier.

Luella-14_2

When I return to work from mat leave, I'll be earning approx £150/ month after childcare is paid (I have twins so £90/ day). For me it will definitely be worthwhile to work, maternity leave has confirmed that I'm not cut out to be a SAHM, I'm simply bored. I thrive on solving crises at work, the endless talk re baby routines etc just isn't doing it for me.
My mum was a SAHM and loved it, but I've worked hard to get good standing at work and would hate to lose that.

FBaby

This is not meant as an attack on working parents at all, but I believe the children are happiest when at least one parent is at home all the time.

Not asking in a defensive way but curious to know what makes you think that.

My kids were both in nursery full-time from the age of 9 and 5 months (4 days a week for my DS for a year), then in morning and afternoon school clubs. I never felt they suffered from it, but a couple of months ago (they are now 11 and 14), I asked them if they wished I had been at home more. The concensus response was that they never minded that they were in nursery/clubs because they really enjoyed them, but that they wished at times I was less tired when I got home, however, they said that they wouldn't change a thing because they know the only reason they get to enjoy the activities they love and the foreign holidays they love and always look so much forward to, is that I work full-time and can afford them.

Takeaway_Addict

jaylee3 wrote: »

Agree with this too ^^^ I have never ever heard any woman say (when she is middle aged (ish) and the kids have grown, that she wishes she had spent more time at work. I have also never ever heard any child say they wish their parents were at work more.

This is not meant as an attack on working parents at all, but I believe the children are happiest when at least one parent is at home all the time. I know it's not always practical, because of how expensive the cost of living is these days, but in an ideal world, someone would be home all the time for the kids when they were school age.

I know, it's a pipedream, but it's just my two cents worth.

I'm not racist but....